133 Conn. App. 140 - State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “it is inappropriate to review an illegal sentence claim that is raised for the first time on appeal. Our rules of practice confer the authority to correct an illegal sentence on the trial court, and that court is in a superior position to fashion an appropriate remedy for an illegal sentence .... Furthermore, the defendant has the right, at any time, to file a motion to correct an illegal sentence and raise [an illegal sentence] claim before the trial court.... State v. Starks , 121 Conn. App. 581 , 592, 997 A.2d 546 (2010) (declining to review unpreserved claim of illegal sentence under State v. Golding , 213 Conn. 233 , 239-40, 567 A.2d 823 [1989], or plain error doctrine embodied in Practice Book § 60-5 ); see also Cobham v. Commissioner of Correction , 258 Conn. 30 , 38 n.13, 779 A.2d 80 (2001) (clarifying that judicial authority in context of Practice Book § 43-22 refers exclusively to trial court); State v. Crump , 145 Conn. App. 749 , 766, 75 A.3d 758 ( [i]t is not appropriate to review an unpreserved claim of an illegal sentence for the first time on appeal ...), cert. denied, 310 Conn. 947 , 80 A.3d 906 (2013) ; State v. Brown , 133 Conn. App. 140 , 145-46 n.6, 34 A.3d 1007 (2012) (same), rev'd on other grounds, 310 Conn. 693 , 80 A.3d 878 (2013).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 179 Conn. App. 185 - State v. Gang Jin